> I agree, this is a good starting point. I don't really see the point
> of the popups,
> but if other folks think they're necessary, I won't argue.
Wouldn't have to be popups. Actually they are used now to provide a
textual description of what the application does, e.g. for "Brasero
Disk Burner" -> "Create and copy CDs and DVDs", which just seem better
than having "Brasero Disk Burner" -> "Brasero". This unfortunately
doesn't provide for the distinguishment we seek, e.g. in example of two
terminals the popups are: "Terminal emulator" and "Use the command line"
> In theory, the technical side should be a thirty second fix. The
> issue would
> be deciding new names. Some things shouldn't be too difficult, such as
> renaming Software Updates to Software Sources.
Combination of previous brings an idea - instead of modifying
application names, we could alter the problematic applications' popups
by adding a binary e.g like: "Terminal: Terminal emulator" and
"Konsole: Use the command line".
+ Both names would stay the same, so we wouldn't have do any actual
renaming and (!) we'd evade any "arguing" among desktops
+ The original explanatory use of popups would be kept
- Great for LXDE and XFCE, but there are no popups in Gnome 3 yet, thus
out of direct reach of Fedora for now.
> I wonder if this should be a QA test? It would help with improving the
> end product for us to check things like this, but it is also fairly
> as to what constitutes as 'too similar.' I'm for it, but the
> subjective nature makes coming up with a clear release criteria
I agree that deciding what is "too similar" can be a tricky one. But
for most of the current apps the problem's simpler - the names are the
Let's bring this up on today's QA meeting, I am sure we'll get a good
input on which way to go there.
The Fedora design team had a meeting today for Fedora 16 planning and
we'd like to try for a four-wallpaper pack for Fedora 16. (We can
provide a slideshow XML file for GNOME, if KDE / XFCE / LXDE support
something like slideshows let us know and we can try to provide it).
We wanted to provide a heads up so that you could account for the space
early on in the cycle if you wanted all of the wallpapers for your spin;
in the past when we've done a slideshow set it has caused last-minute
space issues: we'd very much like to avoid that.
Based on previous wallpapers and the high resolution we are targeting,
6-8 MB is probably a good guesstimate of the maximum amount of space we
might need. In the end, we may need to pull back and focus on really
polishing only one of the wallpapers; as the release progresses we can
keep you updated on what to expect.
If you're interested in following the artwork progress, we have an
artboard here: http://publictest04.fedoraproject.org/artboard/
Is this okay?
(As a favor to me, I'd appreciate it very much if you could keep me on
the CC of replies :) )
I think it's time for the Gnome desktop team to revisit and review which
services are enabled by default on the livecd/usb and enable only those
that benefit the novice desktop end user.
Alot of services are enabled by default that are aimed at enterprise
users and to some extend enterprise hardware usages which would never be
used on a regular desktop/tablet/notebook pc like for example fcoe,
lldpad, iscsi, iscsid, mdmonitor etc. which administrators should enable
encase they use it in their enterprise environment.
A bit of discussion about this is happening in bug 707553
Genes MailLists (lists(a)sapience.com) said:
> The optional executable name should always be available. However these
> details are really 'upstream' aren't they?
Yeah, changing how the various desktop's launchers work is an upstream
decision (in fact, changing what things are named in desktop files probably
is as well.)
At last Fedora QA meeting John Dulaney had a proposal concerning the issue of similar application names we use around Fedora desktops.
For example: surely sometimes you had both GNOME and XFCE installed and went for menus to open - say a terminal. The environment would use the same icon and a same name for both gnome-terminal and xfce-terminal, which resulted in you opening the other app than desired, perhaps (thanks to Murphy's laws :) ) more often than the desired one. More examples of this are "Software updates"/"Software update"(just within GNOME), "System Monitor" for both gnome-system-monitor and ksysguard, some "system-config-*" utilities vs. GNOME control panel applets and more.
This is a call for having a discussion on trying to establish some compromise - on what to put as a name in the desktop file for corresponding applications around different Fedora desktops as well as among applications inside each of those. The goal is simply to avoid people being unable to recognize specific applications around the desktop menus etc., which we could reach simply by rethinking the "name" fields in the *.desktop files of such applications.
The way KDE application launcher handles this also provides nice example for a design solution to this problem. They use a "Generic" (e.g. Terminal) field to describe the application primarily and have the name of the actual binary (e.g. Konsole) present in small letters when the generic name is not unique. For gnome-shell, in it's current in-high-development state, proposing a design like this may also be good idea. Other than that - at least handling this by making a renaming compromise among the desktop environments would be very nice.
We were thinking on expanding the release criteria to have one to deal with this issue, but for sure we need to discuss this first.
Thus - thoughts? :) (Might be a good idea in having the conversation joined in one list we are all subscribed - perhaps test or desktop?)
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 4:43 PM, Genes MailLists <lists(a)sapience.com> wrote:
> On 06/02/2011 09:54 AM, Vitezslav Humpa wrote:
>> Hey folks,
> (1) I think showing the executable name for every application is vital.
> Whether its directly in menu, popup or alternating pink flashing
> lights .. :-)
Sorry but I have to disagree here, cryptic executable names don't
belong in the UI at all.
My name is Joseph Reni, I am a research psychologist by trade (I am a
civilian scientist for NAWCTSD) , I work specifically in interface
design research. Most of my experience is in setting up and deploying
user analyses research through surveys and interactive assessments. I
love prototyping and the interface development workflow. I am also a
masters student at Iowa state University. I am excited to start
working with Fedora usability and design. I would love it if someone
seasoned within this community could give me a call to help get off to
a running start, direct email would also be fine. I am hoping to find
my niche within a Fedora community and start being a valued
OS: Fedora 15
4079525163 (please call any time)